Mac fans have given the latest version of Apple’s Safari browser a frosty reception after complaining that the update is causing frequent crashes.
Apple quietly released Safari 3.2 last week. It comes loaded with improved anti-phishing protection and the latest security updates.
It’s available for download both for Mac OS X …

COMMENTS

fine here

I've updated several machines to 3.2 and had absolutely no problems on any of them. Seems almost all the complaints are coming from people who use 3rd party extensions. Apple should probably build an extension compliance check into Safari like Firefox.

Hrm

Don't know what they are complaining about, its working for me on two Mac's and in Windows without issues on both. The new green certificate confirmation is... shiny. I am sure Paypal will much appreciate it.

This has happened to me too...

... but from a cold, commercial point of view I can see greater value to Apple in releasing a buggy browser with anti-phishing support before Christmas than in sticking with the more stable version. If PayPal continue to tell everyone to switch to Firefox then Apple will lose whatever revenue they're getting from the Google search thingy in the top right (which, incidentally, can't be removed from the toolbar without removing the URL box too).

Safari...Safari...

...Safari...?

Oh, yeah...that piece of shit/e that came bundled with OSX. Huh. I went with Mozilla/Firefox ASAP and didn't look back, so it's looking like my balls are in pretty good shape (not to brag or anything).

Paris, because she's been up close and personal with a few sets of balls in her life.

(...and if I were allowed a second icon -- yes, please; the old Levi's jacket with the Grateful Dead emblem stitched onto the back...)

All is quiet on the Western Front

I've installed the upgrade on both a G4 FW800 and my Vista rig with no real issues on either. The closest I have come so far is that Saturday the Vista version complained that it could not contact the Google server used to update its phishing definitions, and on both the browser seems a bit slower than it was before.

I might also note that I am not using third-party extensions on either, except Adobe Flash.

Assorted Weirdnesses

I kept wondering why I wasn't being offered the Safari 3.2 update, then I realized I installed the Safari 4 beta from the Developer program. The 4.0b has been completely stable and worked fine with SIMBL plugins like PithHelmet (even if it doesn't officially support that version). I wondered if 3.2 > 4.0b, so I uninstalled the 4beta with Apple's official uninstaller, and Software Update then offered the 3.2 update. And then my problems started.

Now I am completely unable to open a new page or link in a tab, it causes 3.2 to crash immediately. This is a dealbreaker. This isn't a problem with accessories like SIMBL, I use nothing but PithHelmet and it works fine with even the 4.0 beta (after editing the .plist to accept higher than authorized versions, so it doesn't auto-disable). But even disabling PithHelmet with 3.2, Safari just does not work. Now, even worse, my reinstalled 4.0b halts intermittently, with a warning that no new page can be opened, do I want to quit immediately and force close all open browser windows? Even if I say no, I get a second warning that some system resources seem to be missing and I should reinstall Safari. This is untenable, a proper uninstaller shouldn't leave resources missing, especially if I just go back and reinstall it. Perhaps the 4.0b installer only works over earlier versions, not 3.2. If so, Apple should release an updated beta installer that works over 3.2.

Well jeez. It now looks like I'm in a mess, due to perhaps incomplete uninstalls or incomplete reinstalls. I've tried reinstalling the 4.0b but the problem persists. If I can't get this working, I'll be forced to do an archive and reinstall of the whole OS.

Apple and bugs

"Apple does not disclose, discuss, or confirm security issues"

Is the core of it for me. I guess it's not releveant to the situation with Safari necessarily, but Apple has even threatened security researchers over presenting a security hole they found (a few years ago, and yes it's been patched -- probably). They were going to "wow" people by showing it with a stock apple with airport card. Apple threatened they *have* to use a different card. Since it worked on almost every card on the market, they did. THEN Apple riled up the fanbois to say "Oh look they aren't even using a stock card! It doesn't even affect a stock Apple setup!" (which it totally did.) I *assume* Apple fixed this bug when everyone else did, but since they didn't even acknowledge it to begin with...?

It won't suprise me at all if Apple:

1) If Webkit and Safari on Mac, they fixed some of the same security flaws that they did for Windows. But they won't be listed, because Apple wants the Mac to appear more secure. (Note, it *IS* way more secure, but Apple wants to spin this even further than reality I think.)

2) They start closing out and deleting threads where people are discussing the Safari 3.2 problems. Apple wants their software to appear bugfree, it's standard operating procedure for them to just delete threads discussing bugs rather than let people discuss it and find a workaround until it's fixed. For me as a free software user this is direct opposite of what should happen.

It's made using Macs more difficult for me than it should be, if I have a problem I can't just google for a solution, because Apple's already found the bug thread and deleted it! I actually had problems about 10 years ago operating a tape drive, it turned out because of a hardware flaw on some Mac SCSI controllers.. I found *one* post about it pointing to supposed info about the flaw, the actual info links had been removed by Apple already. (The MESH controller on many Powermacs could not handle syncronous scsi with scsi disconnect commands properly, whereas the older controller on 6100/7100/8100 and newer one on G3 and up could.) How can I diagnose a problem if Apple removes the info I need!?!?!

@It's stumm!

Safari is primarily a Windows browser

Like any other program that starts off on Macs but gets ported to Windows, Safari is now becoming a Windows browser first. That means that eventually, the Mac versions will be released 6 months later and will be very buggy.

You know this is true because it's always happened in the past. More Windows users have Safari installed than Mac users. After that, it's simple business rules... you look after the majority first and do the best you can for the minorities.

But but but

Macs are mostly great

But some of the Apple software really sucks. Wouldn't touch Safari with a barge pole myself, prefer Firefox by a long shot. Safari is.... somewhere near the bottom of my preferences in terms of browsers.

Pity that their marketing and internal processes are getting to be just as nasty and unethical as Microsoft's. I liked them better when they were a real underdog.

@Charles (Assorted weirdness)

A title is required

"What exactly is it you hate about Safari? There are advantages to Safari over FF, such as:

...

* better rendering"

I can't particularly comment on the other points because I haven't really used Safari enough to really provide a decent argument, but i've noticed that Safari produces some bugs on certain web pages, where Firefox and even IE7 don't.

"Still curious to know why these Safari haters dislike it so much. "It sucks" is not a real reason. :-P"

Why not? If it doesn't do the job well (And thus, sucks), then I think that's a valid reason to dislike a browser.

Personally i'm sticking to Firefox 3 right now, but I might switch to Chrome once it comes out of Beta.

plug me in

I use Safari for most things, but Apple really are shooting themselves in the foot not providing official plugin support. I use SafariStand for flash blocking, but not much else compared to the dozen or so Firefox plugins I've got.

Macs crash

Personally I get way more crashes on Mac OSX than on XP. Firefox 3.0 has died several times (Javascript problems) forcing the need for a reboot to restart the app, and OpenOffice3.0 crashes and takes down the keyboard intermittently - leaving a hard power off as the only option (force quit doesn't work). And I only use it for writing and web-browsing which you would think would be safe.

@Vincent

"i've noticed that Safari produces some bugs on certain web pages, where Firefox and even IE7 don't"

So? I could find numerous examples of pages that work in Safari properly but not in FF, or IE, or Opera or any browser you care to name. No browser is ever going to render all web pages as intended.

However, where two pages are rendered as expected in both Safari and Firefox, the FF rendering is not as good as Safari's. Firefox does not use OS X's Cocoa controls so most of the buttons, checkboxes etc. don't look like other Mac apps. It doesn't even do something as simple as aligning text to the middle of a checkbox right.

"If it doesn't do the job well (And thus, sucks), then I think that's a valid reason to dislike a browser"

Can you come up with a specific example of what it doesn't do well? To me you're being biased for no logical reason.

@David Kelly

"So? I could find numerous examples of pages that work in Safari properly but not in FF, or IE, or Opera or any browser you care to name. No browser is ever going to render all web pages as intended."

I can accept the fact that there's no such thing as a perfect web browser, and that they all have their flaws, but Safari goes titsup on websites that I visit when Firefox doesn't. If Firefox meets my needs better than Safari does, then it's logical that I use Firefox over Safari, right?

Plus I have a lot of add-ons for Firefox that I like to use that are probably unavailable on Safari.

In the end it's all about personal taste, if you prefer Safari as your default web browser, then that's fine.

Meh been fine here

Safari 3.2

I installed it after on my Late 2006 iMac and so far so good. In fact I have been playing around with it testing it's phising abilities on phistank.com . The only thing I've noticed that's different then normal, well normal since I haven't seen this is on sites like Yahoo and Microsoft (Homtail) I've noticed a two tone blue beach ball instead of colour beach ball when processing web clicks on these pages, but nothing crashes. So I don't know...